This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sophia (Gnosticism) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Sophia (wisdom) was copied or moved into Wisdom in Gnosticism with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
It's an odd omission. An explanation of the difference would be apt. 77.250.197.189 ( talk) 01:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
The sources for this article/essay suggest that they were culled from some c1890s text. The whole thing may be cut-and-paste. Anyway, here it is. In ictu oculi ( talk) 03:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
There was an attribution at the bottom of the Sophia (wisdom) page that indicated the source. If you're going to change all of the references (and many of these are helpful), be sure to check for style issues like missing periods and capitalization that wreak havoc with the text. I'm not sure that the article should be called "Wisdom," as "Sophia" is used as a proper name in distinction from (and far more frequently than) "wisdom" in a general sense. See usage:
You're right, the introductory paragraphs under "Gnostic tradition" need some work. Kramden ( talk) 19:46, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
"Sophia" is predominantly used as the name of an Aeon in Gnostic texts and scholarship (see above). Kramden ( talk) 18:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
After reading the Origin of the World from The Nag Hammadi Library, it says that Sophia created God and Jesus (I may have misunderstood, so please let me know as it took 5 times reading it to connect the dots); and that God was jealous and made the rules for Adam and Eve to not eat from the tree of wisdom because he didn't want them to know the truth. It's a very interesting read. According to the Origin of the World, there are 2 Adams and 2 Eves. The first Eve hid in the tree of Wisdom from God, God being the one Pistis Sophia had created from darkness (shadow - the one who had no soul but was ruler over matter) (Starting from paragraph 5 http://gnosis.org/naghamm/origin.html). That is why God said to not eat from the Wisdom tree to the 2nd Eve, because the first Eve knew the truth and hid. According to the text, its Yaldabaoth, unless I am reading it wrong (I have read it 5 times and this is what i got from it) who is the prime parent of all the Gods, angels and the 8 heavens spoken about.
I would suggest doing more reading from the actual translations of the books that were found in the 1940s, that the Church hid, I believe in 1773, because they didn't want anyone knowing the truth. Here is the website and you can even order the book if you would rather read from that then the website. It gives the names of who translated. Unlike the bible which has been translated over 20 times from humans of the church.
Thank you
Amy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.148.158.243 ( talk) 16:18, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
References
Most of the article is a big Non-primary source needed and says who?. Some of it is messy, what f.ex. is "Baruch-Gnosis"? The Book of Baruch is not known to be Gnostic, and 'knowledge' outside of a Gnostic context isn't refered to as 'gnosis'. Only "church father" texts seems to be used in most places, but for certain there are many more sources than the antagonists of the Gnostics? Rursus dixit. ( mbork3!) 08:13, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I have been a Gnostic myself a few years and I'm hitting my first Sophia Service tonight (on Zoom) so I was using this page to look up a bit about her. I noticed the intro says "Gnostics held that she was the syzygy...". My trouble is the past tense for held. We still exist so is the implication we do not or that the belief has changed? As mentioned I was coming here to learn myself so I don't actually know if that is a currently maintained view but it feels familiar. A friend (also Gnostic, same person who introduced me to this church) jokingly oversimplified it as female Jesus a couple years back so anecdotally it seems alive. Peace! ZepawFox ( talk) 00:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sophia (Gnosticism) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Sophia (wisdom) was copied or moved into Wisdom in Gnosticism with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
It's an odd omission. An explanation of the difference would be apt. 77.250.197.189 ( talk) 01:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
The sources for this article/essay suggest that they were culled from some c1890s text. The whole thing may be cut-and-paste. Anyway, here it is. In ictu oculi ( talk) 03:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
There was an attribution at the bottom of the Sophia (wisdom) page that indicated the source. If you're going to change all of the references (and many of these are helpful), be sure to check for style issues like missing periods and capitalization that wreak havoc with the text. I'm not sure that the article should be called "Wisdom," as "Sophia" is used as a proper name in distinction from (and far more frequently than) "wisdom" in a general sense. See usage:
You're right, the introductory paragraphs under "Gnostic tradition" need some work. Kramden ( talk) 19:46, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
"Sophia" is predominantly used as the name of an Aeon in Gnostic texts and scholarship (see above). Kramden ( talk) 18:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
After reading the Origin of the World from The Nag Hammadi Library, it says that Sophia created God and Jesus (I may have misunderstood, so please let me know as it took 5 times reading it to connect the dots); and that God was jealous and made the rules for Adam and Eve to not eat from the tree of wisdom because he didn't want them to know the truth. It's a very interesting read. According to the Origin of the World, there are 2 Adams and 2 Eves. The first Eve hid in the tree of Wisdom from God, God being the one Pistis Sophia had created from darkness (shadow - the one who had no soul but was ruler over matter) (Starting from paragraph 5 http://gnosis.org/naghamm/origin.html). That is why God said to not eat from the Wisdom tree to the 2nd Eve, because the first Eve knew the truth and hid. According to the text, its Yaldabaoth, unless I am reading it wrong (I have read it 5 times and this is what i got from it) who is the prime parent of all the Gods, angels and the 8 heavens spoken about.
I would suggest doing more reading from the actual translations of the books that were found in the 1940s, that the Church hid, I believe in 1773, because they didn't want anyone knowing the truth. Here is the website and you can even order the book if you would rather read from that then the website. It gives the names of who translated. Unlike the bible which has been translated over 20 times from humans of the church.
Thank you
Amy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.148.158.243 ( talk) 16:18, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
References
Most of the article is a big Non-primary source needed and says who?. Some of it is messy, what f.ex. is "Baruch-Gnosis"? The Book of Baruch is not known to be Gnostic, and 'knowledge' outside of a Gnostic context isn't refered to as 'gnosis'. Only "church father" texts seems to be used in most places, but for certain there are many more sources than the antagonists of the Gnostics? Rursus dixit. ( mbork3!) 08:13, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
I have been a Gnostic myself a few years and I'm hitting my first Sophia Service tonight (on Zoom) so I was using this page to look up a bit about her. I noticed the intro says "Gnostics held that she was the syzygy...". My trouble is the past tense for held. We still exist so is the implication we do not or that the belief has changed? As mentioned I was coming here to learn myself so I don't actually know if that is a currently maintained view but it feels familiar. A friend (also Gnostic, same person who introduced me to this church) jokingly oversimplified it as female Jesus a couple years back so anecdotally it seems alive. Peace! ZepawFox ( talk) 00:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)